So how many O’Reilly kids exactly are serving in Iraq?

Yeah, I thought so.

My sides too.
I let ‘em know at da wheel.
Muthaship indeed.

I was thinking more of an appendix: ‘DMS-IVa, Republicans and Conservatives’

I don’t know who the blond is, but someone should tell her to shut the hell up.

I KNEW there was going to be SOME kinda fallout after Olbermann’s last SC!!! I even discussed it downstairs, over there somewhere! I KNEW it!
Great post Jane, and you deserve those hearty belly laughs!!!!
Hell. We ALL do!
Thanks mucho.

that’s some irony there.

surreality teeVee

um, O’Reilly’s kids are pre-teen or young teen. You believe kids as young as that should be serving in the military?

Which I guess means that Fox is now calling for a return of the “Fairness Doctrine”?

What always cracked me up was Fox’s slogan “Fair and Balanced”…by which I supposed they meant in comparison to North Korea’s State radio that they provided some “balance”.

As to the “Fair” I can only think they were considering themselves like the carney’s at one of those ol’ time “Travellin’ Fairs”…the barkers that ran the side-shows with the gimmicked games, hocus-pocus mind-readers, and freak shows. Yep! That’s Fox News!

She said Shut the “h….” up.
Oh, my ears!
That girl.
And, that Guy…uh, Keith, uh.
Oh, my goodness.
My sides.

You think kids as young as that whose moms and dads are gone, on their third, fourth, fifth tours of duty, kids as young as that whose moms and dads are coming home in body bags or maimed or PTSD-ed or suicidal are not serving?

Don’t ask me to give any brief to O’Lielly’s disingenuous talking points.

No, no one believes that. There’s a minimum age, of course. There’s lots of Bush family members old enough. How come none of them will serve?

Great post, Jane

It’s DSM IV (Diagnostic and Statistical Manual), btw. (/editor hat)

FunnyDiva

Gotta love it when you get two media outlets going in a real pissing contest.

Newspapers (back in the day when most cities had 2 or more) used to go out and pick fights with their competition. It usually led to two basic results:

- better circulation (today, viewership),
- better reporting (because another media outlet was actively working to pick apart the stories and expose more facts).

If this means we can get better truth-squadding on the TeeVee - we all owe Keith a big [insert favorite thank-you gift] for picking his fight with O’Reilly and fanning the flames. Beats the hell out of talking heads reading press releases and spin.

Actually, it’s DSM-IV, Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders

oh, my, they do a lovely job of keeping a straight face while reading their “shocked, I’m shocked” lines.

Is there an Emmy for beat pretense of moral outrage by a phony news anchor?

well then, how many of o’reillies family are serving?

not o’rielly, not his wife, not any of their immdiate

thats’s the point

This is as good as the wingnut writers suing Regnery because they thought they were being cheated. Keep it up, losers, you’re comedy gold!

Heh. You can drink my Coke for me. Can’t stand the stuff.

FunnyD

Oh, Jane, thank you for this!
I’m trying to think of some profund comment on this –
all I can come up with is some version of “dish it out, can’t take it.”
Anybody else more eloquent?

My general reaction to this has been slack-jawed disbelief. Thanks for making me laugh instead.

Me either. Plus there’s a boycott on.

Sorry, I didn’t see your correction. Silly me, read the post before the comments.

Fox and Friends is unwatchable. It is a hideous program.

Fox news is, in general, a blight on journalism. In some respects it has gone beyond bad journalism and engaged in journalistic misconduct I would judge to be grossly immoral.

Bill O’Reilly is a jerk and worse. But, and this is going to get me in trouble, his show in terms of fairness and balance is better than Keith Olbermann’s.

I meant to post this the other day when Lady Jane was on with Amanda Carpenter.

Hah. Just watched the video — methinks that if John Chancellor were doing a personal commentary during the reign of this boy-king, he wouldn’t have hesitated to call him out.

Disrespect. From the all-disrespect to anybody Not-a-Republican, fawning on the boy-king - network.

You can Digg Jane’s excellent post HERE

What?
: D

Ha! Lady Jane vs. Oh Mandy….
Good one SD.

We’ll do it live! Fuck it!

Orly?

lmao

Yeh…imagine what it must be like for someone to always pre-record and get to re-do over after do over?
Not like here.
This is Live, Man.
You fuck up and it’s online forevahhhhh.
Ha.
(I’m laughing at myself.)

here’s the video of BillO flipping out. I figured everyone had seen it already.

Nothin’ to be sorry ’bout, darlin’.
Nice to know I’m not alone in my detail-oriented overfussiness!
FunnyD

Signing off. Gotta go sew before my friend comes to take over the machine…

Tweety is giving some more air time to McBush/Hagee, with a panel this time.

He opened and closed his show with Hagee.

Looks like David Gregory is going to talk about Hagee also.

twolf:
and here it is with the producer edited back in!
Bwha bwaha bwahahahahahaha!

FunnyD

that’s all wright with me.

Yeah, that one is hilarious!

McCain tries to make his Hagee denouncement a Rev. Wright story.

No no. Jane has it right:

Diary of the Maniacally Stupid, Fourth Edition

- Tom

OT but not wholly unrelated:
tivo alert for teeVee tonight PBS

Independent Lens: “A Dream in Doubt”
“A Dream in Doubt” examines hate crimes against minorities in the U.S. after the Sept. 11 attacks, including the shooting death of Balbir Singh Sodhi …

Jaun Cole is on the NewsHour just now

Just a late drive-by because I can’t resist pointing out that

it takes one to know one!

The pot is calling the kettle black.

Bob in HI

Actually, I saw that on our PBS station last night.
Unutterably depressing. Well, with one exception - the willingness to forgive of the family of two victims that is the focus of the piece.
For an American who hoped we might be past that sort of thing…de-press-ing.

In case anyone is wondering, as far as I can determine, the “New York Times column” the Fox idiots refer to in an effort to pretend that their complaint has more authority is the TV column. Not like we need any further evidence of their idiocy, but it’s no surprise that they try to insinuate that’s something on the editorial page.

This is funny. Thanks, Jane.

What I fear is that we’re going the way of the Roman factions who bore the names of certain colors – the main ones being the Blues, Greens, Whites and Reds. These were organized by the various factions as part of the Roman spectacula.

… recently, however, the significance of the theatrical and the spectacular in everyday life in the ancient world has earned a keener appreciation among Roman historians, both of politics and art history.10 In particular, spectacle is now recognised as a key element in the articulation of social relations between the Roman élite and its dependants, be they the urban plebs or provincials across the Empire (e.g. Yakobson 1992; Lintott 1993: 175-85). The current fashion for studying the theatrical and spectacular the Roman world should not be misconstrued as some sort of “Gladiator-effect”. It roots are grounded in the proliferation of new approaches to the study of the ancient world.

With the advent of the principate, the provision of spectacles at the city of Rome became the preserve of the emperors. Such games were no more simple acts of generosity now than they had been in the late Republic. That most famous of Roman spectacular venues, the Colosseum, epitomizes the phenomenon. It was begun by Vespasian and dedicated by Titus, the first two emperors of the Flavian dynasty that swept to power in the civil wars of AD 68-69. More importantly, it was built on the site of the private gardens of Nero’s Golden House. The significance of this transformation was not lost on contemporaries (Martial, Spectacula 1. 2; Suetonius Vespasian 9). Where once the tyrant Nero indulged his private whims, now the new dynasty enchanted the public with spectacles on a scale beyond their wildest expectations. … As with the triumvirs and Augustus, so with Vespasian and Titus the provision of entertainments helped to secure power and legitimation.

Spectacle, of course, was not simply a case of providing entertainments; they had to provoke a favourable reaction too, as Nero found out to his cost when he publicly persecuted the Christians after the Great Fire of Rome in AD 64 (Tacitus, Annals 15. 44). Recent studies, sensitive to this fact, have sought to bring to light evidence for the interaction between the providers of spectacles and the audiences to which they appealed (Aldrete 1999; Lim 1999). The evidence is scattered and, with the exception of graffiti (Gregori 2001), rarely gives us direct access to the minds of the spectators themselves. But such material is beginning to show Roman historians of other periods something that their colleagues working on late antiquity have known for some time from the evidence of acclamations at Aphrodisias in Caria (Roueché 1984): responses to spectacles, whether in venues for the games or in the street, were often loud and agitated. In turn, these approaches have yielded useful data for the role spectacle played in political life at Rome. Recent work on political oratory at late-Republican and imperial Rome has exploited this research on the mechanics of spectacle in the Roman world. It emphasizes the need to appreciate the visual as well as verbally rhetorical devices employed by orators haranguing the people. Words were important, of course; but so too were the gestures and postures adopted by the speakers, as well as the physical locations in which speeches were delivered (Aldrete 1999; Vasaly 1993). From works such as these comes affirmation that political and social life in the Roman world involved not only the intellect, but also the senses.

Well, perhaps you get the idea. Faux Nooz was in cahoots with the Bush administration to foster the “reality” being created for the hoi polloi. The “media” helped the public to understand what was important, who were the good guys and the bad guys, and how the games were to be played. Above all, “News” ceased to be about providing information and became instead a means of manipulating public opinion.

Bob in HI

LOL!!!

This is hilarious…ONCE again proving that ALL Fox news readers collectively have an IQ less than a bag of hammers…

Amazing that this kind of filler actually goes on the air…

Just following in Daddy’s footsteps.